Thank you Har for proving my point that there is no aids crisis. You’ve shown yourself to be another empty, ultra liberal, who spews insults, instead of lucid responses, and when you can’t think of an insult, you refuse to answer the question.
The point of the thread was my frustration, misplaced or otherwise, with President Bush’s not using the majorities in House and Senate to return our country back to its roots: individual effort, a balanced budget or close, reduction of regulationss on working people. (So, Harriss444 (or whatever) starts the nonsense about an AIDS crisis and how ‘Reagan ignored it’ — as if a President could somehow stop a disease and the principal behavior which leads to its spread.)
Instead, President Bush seems happy to continue down the same old path — notice how the Social Security reform is gone. The Dems demagogged the issue and he backed down — with majorities everywhere. (BTW: if you’re under 35, it’s mathematically impossible for you to ever collect anything. The huge deficit is projected using a 3% econ growth rate. Won’t happen.)
Rainjack,I think alot of people didnt care that much for Gore either,I think it is just the way the past two elactions have been handled,it makes a lot of Americans wonder if this is a trend that is going 2 continue into the future,its like we are supposed to be the most honorable nation and the whole deal seems like a big cluster f**k.Most other countries would have had a revolt if things of this nature were handled this way.
[quote]ron33 wrote:
Rainjack,I think alot of people didnt care that much for Gore either,I think it is just the way the past two elactions have been handled,it makes a lot of Americans wonder if this is a trend that is going 2 continue into the future,its like we are supposed to be the most honorable nation and the whole deal seems like a big cluster f**k.Most other countries would have had a revolt if things of this nature were handled this way.[/quote]
This is just my opinion, and I’m sure it will get refuted, but I think the last 2 Pres. elections were turning points. Particularly in 2000. Since that time Republicans have won more and more elections by wider and wider margins.
2004 showed Bush winning convincingly. Not by a wide margin, but when compared to 2000 - it was a landslide.
2008 will be even bigger for the right. It may not last as long as the left’s strangle-hold on the power, but I don;t think you will see the dems do very much on the national scene as a party for quite a while.
[quote]harris447 wrote:
You guys are right: you’re the winners. Just tell me, when do you feel the most like a winner?
Is it when you pay over three dollars at the pump?
Is it at the funeral of a 20-year-old kid who died in a war that didn’t need to be fought?
Is it when you look at the scarred face of downtown New York?
Is it when a US city dies, partly because the President appointed incompent cronies?
Is it when the administration outs undercover CIA operatives?
Is it when a man who ran the single-worst school system in the country has the balls to call himself the ‘education presdient’?
I wish I was a winner like you guys.
[/quote]
Mostly, it’s the morning after watching all the election returns come in from the night before. I think specifically, it’s the first Wednesday after the first Tuesday of November in the even numbered years. At least it has been for the most part since 1994. I think that was the last time there was anything even resembling a dem-led house, or senate. Excepting the short time immediately after Jumpin Jim Jeffers pulled his little stunt giving the left a defacto majority for a couple of years.
But please. Keep up with the whiny-assed loser routine. It is very entertaining.
[quote]harris447 wrote:
You guys are right: you’re the winners. Just tell me, when do you feel the most like a winner?
Is it when you pay over three dollars at the pump?
[/quote]
That is awesome! Bush caused the hurricane, which flooded a major city so gas prices could sore to three dollars. Kerry or Gore would have been a better choice.
Didn’t clinton plant a missle into the side of a chinese embassy? That sounds pretty senseless too.
I am sure Gore would of stopped 9/11, just like clinton would have taken out bin laden if he only had the chance.
It is funny to hear someone saying that. This is a total opposite of what JFK promoted. What a joke.
Almost as bad as selling top secrets to China.
The education program is not the problem. It is the people in the education system that are the problem.
i.e. students that don’t apply themselves, and parents that expect to sit at home watch tv, and their kids learn on their own.
To do that you have to take some personal responsibilty, and stop expecting the government to fix your problems.
“Ask not what your country can do for you. ASk what can you do for your country.” ~JFK
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Imagine if Reagan had a 55-45 Senate and a Republican House. Chairs of all the committees! Absolutely an f’in shame!!
Jump in guys with one for the Gipper! How would RR have handled…?
You make some interesting points. However, Reagan’s strength lied not with the other branches of government, but with the people! When he wanted something done he would simply appeal directly to the people through the television medium and the outpouring of support that he achieved through letters to Senators and Congressmen did the trick.
Ronald Reagan was indeed unique in that respect. He came across as honest, warm and very charismatic. I can’t imagine another President having that sort of effect on the populace.[/quote]
Andrew Jackson and Abraham Lincoln were the same way. Except that whole…doing something useful thing…that Reagan never did.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Imagine if Reagan had a 55-45 Senate and a Republican House. Chairs of all the committees! Absolutely an f’in shame!!
Jump in guys with one for the Gipper! How would RR have handled…?
You make some interesting points. However, Reagan’s strength lied not with the other branches of government, but with the people! When he wanted something done he would simply appeal directly to the people through the television medium and the outpouring of support that he achieved through letters to Senators and Congressmen did the trick.
Ronald Reagan was indeed unique in that respect. He came across as honest, warm and very charismatic. I can’t imagine another President having that sort of effect on the populace.
Andrew Jackson and Abraham Lincoln were the same way. Except that whole…doing something useful thing…that Reagan never did.[/quote]
Your right that ending the cold war thing had nothing to do with Reagan.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
So, you’d want Carter back, with 14% interest rates, an oil embargo, rampant inflation? You’d want that cluster-fuck in the desert when they tried to save the hostages?
[/quote]
Aren’t we seeing a “cluster-fuck” now?
AIDS is a preventable disease, unlike breast cancer, lupus, alzheimer’s, and a very long list of other horrific diseases. The people suffering from these non-preventable diseases could benefit greatly from the man-power, funding, and public attention that has been given (for years) to AIDS. There is no “epidemic.” There is no crisis. It’s simply a syndrome that has been politicized (by right and left) and overblown. I’m not saying it shouldn’t have gotten any attention, but it certainly has gotten way more than necessary or warranted.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
So, you’d want Carter back, with 14% interest rates, an oil embargo, rampant inflation? You’d want that cluster-fuck in the desert when they tried to save the hostages?
Aren’t we seeing a “cluster-fuck” now?
[/quote]
No. You see things too negatively. We are seeing a pretty good job of pumping New Orleans out and almost 40% of the people will be allowed to return next week. The death toll is far lower than projected.
We are seeing a strong economy that has been hit hard by terrorism, natural disaster, foreign competition and an oil crunch, yet we are still doing far better than we did under Carter. A big part of it is because Bush has a much better understanding of how the economy works than Carter ever did.
We have brought democracy to two of the vilest regimes on the planet. We are fighting and killing the terrorists on foreign soil not ours.
These are all positive things. Of course there are some bad things too, but it will all work out in the end.
Yes, but you won’t catch any of the other diseases, you will either develop them or not based on internal factors.
Now that AIDS is somewhat better understood and somewhat manageable, it is easy in hindsight to say there was no crisis.
AIDS was spreading at an alarming rate and in fact, at the time, was a crisis because of its rate of spread and the fact so little was initially known about it. Unfortunately, the groups that it spread within most readily were not mainstream members of society, so they are quickly cast aside as cannon fodder.
It has now been politicized too much to make it worth trying to discuss it. Funny how everything heads that way.
Before you hurt yourself while patting yourself on the back, you may want to wait and see what actually happens in those countries.
Iraq, in particular, is on the brink of an internal meltdown due to the current constitutional crisis. Hopefully it will make it through this problem.
However, if it does, the constitution being proposed does very little to create a democracy that we would be able to recognize as such, as it does not contain things like equality for citizens or separation of church and state.
[quote]nephorm wrote:
Regarding the AIDS “crisis”:
AIDS is a preventable disease, unlike breast cancer, lupus, alzheimer’s, and a very long list of other horrific diseases. The people suffering from these non-preventable diseases could benefit greatly from the man-power, funding, and public attention that has been given (for years) to AIDS. There is no “epidemic.” There is no crisis. It’s simply a syndrome that has been politicized (by right and left) and overblown. I’m not saying it shouldn’t have gotten any attention, but it certainly has gotten way more than necessary or warranted.[/quote]
Lol wow Reagan ended the cold war huh? What about those, uh, Russians…who actually overthrew the government…hahahahhahahahhahahahahahaha Gotta love Reagan guys.
Hey did you know Reagan invented the light bulb to? That “Edison” thing was just a vast left wing conspiracy against Conservative inventors.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Reagan did not ignore the AIDS crisis. That is another left-wing lie.
If they keep saying it enough people will believe it.[/quote]
Agreed. I was a kid when Reagan was in office, and that was when they started educating the public about AIDS. By the time Reagan’s VP was President, they were giving us AIDS learning materials and telling us about the warnings in school. So, how in the hell can someone say that he ignored it. He STARTED the AIDS awareness efforts.